Njal's Saga, 127-136

I was thinking about the fostering system the people in this book have and the modern foster care system and was somewhat irked by what I saw.

They are similar in the respect that fostered kids aren't neccesarily orphans. Other than that the differences are great. I glanced at the back of the book and it said that fostering strengthened alliances and the kids could form stong bonds with their fosters, for example Hoskuld became really close to Njal and his family, even though they killed his father, and they in turn helped him get a good wife. Also, the fostering sems to be rather permanent, the kid staying in one particular home.

Today's foster systems aren't the political device they were then, the kids can be shifted around and not neccessarily bond in the way we see in the book. It makes me sad because today there is such a negative image upon foster care, and we see that fostering could also result in great things. I realized that many traditions that were commonplace and funcional are now bizarre to us, traditions such as polygamy and this particular form of the foster care system.

Njal's Saga, 106-126

The momentary sight of Amundi the bind obviously made me think of the miracles of Jesus, but Amundi was only given temporary sight, and he used it to take bloody revenge, which seems very different from what Jesus would've done. And yet Iceland had been Christianized, but all these murders to avenge previous deaths seems very anti-Christian, as Christ preached against "an eye for an eye". So it feels like Iceland is stuck somewhere between their past and their prsent, creating the hybrid world we see in the saga. For example, Valgard refuses the faith and breaks crosses, then falls sick and dies, which implies divine punishment, even though the Christian faith tells a tale of a lovingGod that most likely wouldn't simply kill a man.

It annoys me a little that the passage of time is not specified, what I mean is that a bunch of chapters end with "and there was peace for time" or something like that, soI'm never sure how much time has passed and around what age the characters are, etc.

Njal, who must be old by now, has lost none of his wit, as we see he sees straight though Mord's plan. All of these virtues really make me see why the saga is titled as Njal's, even if he doesn't appear in the whole thing or participate everywhere.

Njal's Saga, 93-105

Njal once agan displays his mental prowess within the first chapter, by defusing a potential dangerous situation and getting possible enemies to accept a settlement.

I believe Njl arranged for Keti to take Hoskuld, and then allow Njal to take him, as probably Thorgerd would not have allowed Njal to take him. Njal apparently made a good call, as the boy beame like a son to him, and a good person and fighter. The fact that it was good (d somewhat surprising) that Njal and Hoskuld had bonded like father and son is brought up in chaper 97.

I reallyliked the clever way Njal gets a godord for Hoskuld, because it shows the greatness of his intelligence, but it also adds a slight edge of dislike to his character for me, because he seems ruthless because of the fact that he embroiled an entire people's affairs to marry his foster son to a picky woman.

Njal's Saga, 78-92

In chapter 78 we can see a great contradiction in Njal's saga, the wierd position of law in a place so lawless. The men bring in complex lawsuits and go to the Thing, but still kill and fight and deceive, and we can see this cleary when the Sigfussons ask to goto trial and Njal advises themto kill instead.

When I looked up halberd in the index it is mentioned that Gunnar's had magicalpowers, another common theme in mythology, and in greek mythology, which we saw.

Annother strange Gunnar/Oddyseus parallel in their mother's devotion towards' them, as we see in Rannveig after her sons's death, as she is the one who says the halberd should be used to aaenge Gunnar. Also, Odysseus visits the Underworld and speaks with the dead, and in the Saga Gunnar recites verses after he dies, which motivates Hogni to avenge him.

Njal's Saga, 60-77

I really liked the concept of honor in this art of the saga and the way Gunnar steps up and makes an alliance in the process. It made me think of James Clavells' series of novels set in Asia, especially Japan, with all these political power plays.

I was surprised that Gunnar would go against Njal and not warn him, but then I saw that it was out of concern, rather than a ploy to undermine Njal or something like that. It adds to my reasons for liking Gunnar, as he worries for Njal's sons and thus goes without them, as ill advised as that turned out.

I feel almost bad for Thorir, because he was smart but still fought because he was asked and had to ask not to be avenged, and the way he speaks to Thorgrim really made me feel for him, which surprised me because the style of the saga didn't appeal much to me at first.

I really like the recurrng theme of prophetic dreams (like Gunnar's) that we also saw in Gilgamesh, the Bible, and Greek and roman myths.

Kol's death reminded me of the old Looney Tunes cartoons. Like when the coyote would run off cliff, he'd stay there, then realized he was in mid air, wave goodbye and then fall, Kol stares at his leg and then when it is confirmed his leg is gone, he falls and dies.

Njal's Saga, 39-59

The slavery idea really stuck in my head so I decided to blog solely about slavery. We (or I)usually perceive slavery as a a phenomena in the eighteenth century in the Americas, and I don't think we picture europeans and icelandic people as slave owners and traders, but in truth slavery was a wide spread practice through human history. It was practiced as far back as egypt and the mayas, abolished in Mauritania in August, 2007, and still occurs today, especially in the form of sex trafficking.

Slavery was a huge part of the Roman Empire, mking up most of the economy and workforce, which eneded up contributing to the collapse. I bring it up because we all know a large part of our civilization is based on the roman empire.

We also saw in Night by Elie Wiezel that in the camps they had a form of pseudo slavery where they trafficked kidss as protitutes to homsexuals and others. In Colombia las FARC also takes young girls to serve as protitutes.

Even if we think of slavery as an archaic concept, we still feel its effects today and we can also see this in Njl's Saga. We apparently cannot escape slavery and what it entails, even if we look upon it with disgust and contempt today.

Njal's Saga, 30-38

I was struck by the fact that Gunnar so quickly prepared to defend himself. Then I compared the safety situations of Today and Yesterday. Today we still feel unsafe, due to things like 9/11. But Yesterday, life was also very unsafe. Not only could you die frombattle wounds, but die due to infection, or mysterious diseases. Of curse when I say mysterious I mean back then they didn't know what caused them or how to defend themselves, unlike us today. For example today a simply cold won't kill us. Back then it could mean a death sentence.

The back cover describes Gunnar as having an aversion to bloodshed, but being very good at it. In this chapter we can see that he is definetely good at it. He is the first to jump on to Vandil's ship, with no helmet. He seem to exemplify a very popular type of hero: the reluctan hero. This hero does not neccessarily believe or want to do what he/she does, but they are very good at it, and keep doing it because they must, like Gunnar.

I was surprised when Gunnar took booty after the fight, as he hadn't initiated the conflict. then it goeson to say that they had other battles and won. That led me to believe that these incidents of piracy were common, and so the victory took the spoils, whether he started it or not.

Njal's Saga, 19-29

What struck about the saga was that it seemed to be listing more than telling and it didn't seem "poetic" in a way. Like a kid's story for english class, no particular wit or charm that author (or successful ones) have. But of course this is an old text, and translated, where it could have lost much of its original value.

The description of Gunnar made me think of Odysseus, and compare the epic traits of both. For example, they both greatly prize the ability to fight and physical prowess. However in the rain department Njal is closer to Odysseus, as shown by the plan he gives Gunnar.

I was surprised at the break of ideas between chapters 19 and 20 where the story suddenly shifts from Gunnar to Njal. The two bits soon link in chapter 21.

Revelations

Revelations uses the basic tools all prophecies use, metaphor and vagueness. Metaphor can lend itself to multiple interpretations, and any event withing those interpretations can be taken to mean the prophecy came true. Vagueness serves the same purpose, because more events can fit within the criteria of the prophecy and makes it more acceptable. Both of these elements can also be found in the prophecies of one of the most famous prophets, Nostradamus.

I find the imagery of the dragon in 12 interesting because dragons would be symbols of evilfor a long time, especially in the Christian/Catholic world, exemplified by the tale of Saint George and the Dragon. All reptiles seemed to have a negativeimage, and it lasts until today, and I find it interesting that we can trace it backto the Bible where sakes, serpents, and dragins were vilified.

Gospel Of John

At the very beginning of John I noticed the fact that "Word" is capitalized, and I remembered that when we started the Bible we noticed the "tricks" the translators used, and amongst them was capitalization. The Word is God's and therefore Holy, and evven today the Word means the Bible and its teachings. But I also see an ulterior motive for this capitalization. Since the translators could not take credit for their work, they make their work into something with life, something holy and by association be special, unique and holy themselves. In a way, the "persona" given to the Word is the signature of the "authors".

Light is also capitalized and is the embodiment of good and its opposite darkness, not capitalized, is said to "comprehend[ed] it not", John 1, verse 5. By not capitalizing evil and making it seem "stupid" it undemines evil and changes theimpression evil makes.

Gospel Of Luke

I was also familiar with this story, (I am beginning to suspect I am familiar with most or all of the New Testament). Before I do get on to the analysis of the text I was overjoyed to read this at Christmas time because it brought back so many memories, good memories, that I had put aside and I relived these teachings and reconnected in ways I'd forgotten I could connect with the Bible. It amazes me how influential such an old text can be, especially in the Ages of Cliff Notes and MTV where people barely read anymore, and yet knows all these stories and prayers and take such comfort and insiration from something thousands of years old and see it as new. In tis way I see how Holy Texts really can be Holy, because they unite people and give hope and kindness to those that have given up. Our knowledge of religion makes up much more of us than we think, even if one doesn't believe, the Bible and its teachings allows connections to other humans that we don't even see.

I find it very interesting tht Zacharias' punishment is that he cannot speak. Babies cannot speak and must communicate dfferently, as must Zacharias. He must live the heplessness and isolation of babies until his own arrives, he must experience that inability to communicate.

Mark, Chapters 11-End

I was familiar with the story of Jesus and the temple, and I find it diverting to see that Jesus' ideas on money are still seen today. For example, on a long plane ride I borrowed my father's magazine, which was the Economist. While flipping through it, I saw on article on Sarkozy, France's president, and the article talked about him breaking taboos and tradition or France's presidency. Amongst them was the money taboo, where most presidents hid their wealth because wealth implied underhandedness and criminality, and Sarkoy broke this taboo by openly displaying hs wealth. The temple troy brought this to mind becuse I saw how long lasting and how strong the teachings of Jesus are. In Colombia for example, vast wealth is also (generally) lookeddown upon because it also implies criminal activity and a hrse often muttered when people display that sort of thing is "Sera narco?". However, that is in cases of "suspicious" wealth and such, like getting rich very quickly, and the riteria is different in our school, for example, as many people are wealthy without suspicion of illegal activity. The real point I'm getting to is that with the influences of the Bible wealth is a tricky thing and your actions in relation to wealth vastly color others' opinions of you. But I'm not really adept at analyzing the way people erceive wealth because it's much more complicated than the surface appearance and I'd probably need degrees in Psychology and Sociology to really render an adequate thesis, so let's leave this as an educated guess.